Author + information
- Perwaiz M. Meraj,
- Rajkumar Doshi,
- Amitkumar Patel,
- Anmol Singh,
- Sheryl Kompancaril and
- Rebecca Sgroi
Background: Many studies have tried to determine the optimal therapy options with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) when performing high risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aims to describe a real-world cohort of high risk patients and their outcomes when comparing IABP and pLVAD.
Methods: 1093 patients from 5 tertiary care centers in New York City between January 2011-April 2016 were selected. They had either an IABP or pLVAD as MCS for PCI. The primary end point of this study was death on discharge. Secondary outcomes were myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, tamponade, congestive heart failure (CHF), cardiogenic shock, new dialysis requirement, red blood cell transfusion and bleeding within 72 hours. All data was prospectively collected.
Results: No difference existed between the groups in any demographics data after performing multivariate analysis including cardiogenic shock patients. Post PCI MI was higher in the pLVAD group, however so were the complexity of the cases.
Conclusions: MCS has evolved over the past decade and with more powerful devices interventionalists are more likely to perform more high risk interventions. The difference in the outcomes of the IABP and pLVAD groups were not apparent, likely due to the higher complexity of cases selected for pLVAD.
Poster Hall, Hall C
Friday, March 17, 2017, 3:45 p.m.-4:30 p.m.
Session Title: Coronary Intervention in Interventional Cardiology: Advanced Device Use
Abstract Category: 21. Interventional Cardiology: Coronary Intervention: Devices
Presentation Number: 1155-157
- 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation